19690 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 75 / Thursday, April 19, 2007 / Notices 

1 Dak Americas LLC., Nan Ya Plastics Corporation 

America, and Wellman, Inc. 

2 ITI, Ashley and Fibertex are interested parties 

who are U.S. importers of PSF. Ashley and Fibertex 

submitted joint case briefs. 

which the Secretary considers 

ministerial.’’

After analyzing all interested parties’

comments, we have determined, in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(e), that 

while some alleged errors were not 

ministerial, by definition, (i.e., surrogate 

financial ratio calculations and not 

providing an opportunity for comment 

on a certain issue), one ministerial error 

existed with respect to the calculation of 

the surrogate value for cold–rolled steel 

that was used in the Since Hardware 

margin calculation for the Final Results. 

For a detailed discussion of these 

ministerial error allegations, as well as 

the Department’s analysis, see 

Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Office 

Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 

through Christopher D. Riker, Program 

Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 

from Kristina Horgan and Bobby Wong, 

International Trade Analysts, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 9, titled 2004/2005 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review of Final Results of Antidumping 

Administrative Review of Floor–

standing, Metal–top Ironing Tables and 

Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s 

Republic of China: Analysis of 

Ministerial Error Allegations (April 12, 

2007) (Ministerial Error Allegation 

Memorandum). The Ministerial Error 

Allegation Memorandum is on file in 

the Central Records Unit, room B–099 of 

the Department of Commerce. 

Therefore, in accordance with section 

751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e), 

we are amending the Final Results of the 

administrative review of ironing tables 

from the PRC. The revised weighted–

average dumping margins are listed 

below. For company–specific 

calculations, see Memorandum to The 

File, through Christopher D. Riker, 

Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 9, from Bobby Wong, 

International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 9, titled 

Administrative Review of Floor 

standing, Metal–top Ironing Tables and 

Certain Parts Thereof (Ironing Tables) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(PRC): Since Hardware (Guangzhou) 

Co., Ltd. (Since Hardware) Amended 

Final Analysis Memorandum. The 

revised final weighted–average dumping 

margin for Since Hardware is: 

Exporter Margin 

(percent) 

Since Hardware (Guangzhou) 

Co., Ltd. .................................. 0.45% (de 

minimis) 

The Department shall determine, and 

CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on 

all appropriate entries based on the 

amended final results. For details on the 

assessment of antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries, see Final Results. 

These amended final results are 

published in accordance with sections 

751(h) and 777(I)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: April 12, 2007. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–7449 Filed 4–18–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

A–570–905 

Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative 

Determination of Critical 

Circumstances: Certain Polyester 

Staple Fiber from the People’s 

Republic of China 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 19, 2007 

SUMMARY: On December 26, 2006, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

‘‘Department’’) published its 

preliminary determination of sales at 

less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the 

antidumping investigation of certain 

polyester staple fiber (‘‘PSF’’) from the 

People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). 

The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is 

October 1, 2005, to March 31, 2006. We 

invited interested parties to comment on 

our preliminary determination of sales 

at LTFV. Based on our analysis of the 

comments we received, we have made 

changes to our calculations for the 

mandatory respondents. The final 

dumping margins for this investigation 

are listed in the ‘‘Final Determination 

Margins’’ section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Holton or Paul Walker, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–1324 or (202) 482–

0413, respectively. 

Final Determination 

We determine that PSF from the PRC 

is being, or is likely to be, sold in the 

United States at LTFV as provided in 

section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (‘‘the Act’’). The estimated 

margins of sales at LTFV are shown in 

the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’

section of this notice. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Case History 

The Department published its 

preliminary determination of sales at 

LTFV on 

December 26, 2006. See Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and Partial Affirmative 

Determination of Critical 

Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple 

Fiber from the People’s Republic of 

China, 71 FR 77373 (December 26, 

2006) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 

Between January 8 and February 16, 

2007, the Department conducted 

verifications of Cixi Jiangnan Chemical 

Fiber Co. Ltd. (‘‘Cixi Jiangnan’’), Far 

Eastern Industries (Shanghai) Ltd. (‘‘Far 

Eastern’’), Hangzhou Huachuang Co., 

Ltd. (‘‘Hangzhou Huachuang’’), Jiaxing 

Fuda Chemical Fibre Factory (‘‘Fuda’’), 

Ningbo Dafa Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. 

(‘‘Ningbo Dafa’’) and Zhaoqing Tifo New 

Fiber Co., Ltd. (‘‘Tifo’’). See the 

‘‘Verification’’ section below for 

additional information. 

We invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Determination. On March 

15, 2007, the Petitioners,1 Insituform 

Technologies, Inc. (‘‘ITI’’), Ashley 

Furniture Industries, Inc. (‘‘Ashley’’), 

Fibertex Corporation (‘‘Fibertex’’)2, Far 

Eastern, Cixi Jiangnan and Ningbo Dafa 

filed case briefs. On March 20, 2007, the 

Petitioners, Far Eastern, Cixi Jiangnan 

and Ningbo Dafa filed rebuttal briefs. 

All parties that submitted a timely 

request for a hearing in this case 

withdrew those requests. Therefore, the 

Department did not hold a hearing. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

investigation are addressed in the 

‘‘Investigation of Certain Polyester 

Staple Fiber from the People’s Republic 

of China: Issues and Decision 

Memorandum,’’ dated April 10, 2007, 

which is hereby adopted by this notice 

(‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’). 

A list of the issues which parties raised 

and to which we respond in the Issues 

and Decision Memorandum is attached 

to this notice as an Appendix. The Issue 

and Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file in the Central 

Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Main Commerce 

Building, Room B–099, and is accessible 

on the Web at http://www.trade.gov/ia. 

The paper copy and electronic version 

of the memorandum are identical in 

content. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 75 / Thursday, April 19, 2007 / Notices 19691 

Changes Since the Preliminary 

Determination 

Based on our analysis of comments 

received, we have made changes to the 

margin calculation for Cixi Jiangnan, Far 

Eastern and Ningbo Dafa as follows. 

We have made the following changes 

to Cixi Jiangnan’s margin calculation: 

Other than the issues discussed 

below, we have determined to not 

include marine insurance from Cixi 

Jiangan’s CNF market economy 

purchases. At verification, Cixi Jiangnan 

provided information that it did not 

incur marine insurance. For a detailed 

analysis of Cixi Jiangnan’s margin 

calculation, see Final Determination in 

the Investigation of Certain Polyester 

Staple Fiber from the People’s Republic 

of China: Analysis Memorandum for 

Cixi Jiangnan Fiber Co. Ltd., dated April 

10, 2007. 

We have made the following changes 

to Far Eastern’s margin calculation: 

Other than the issues discussed 

below, we have determined to include 

the additional international freight 

expense that Far Eastern reported as a 

minor correction to its market economy 

international freight expense. 

Furthermore, we have also determined 

to make an adjustment to Far Eastern’s 

reported scrap by–product by capping it 

at the level of scrap it actually produced 

during the POI. Finally, we have 

determined to use a surrogate value for 

Far Eastern’s purchases of EG from its 

affiliated supplier. See below and Issues 

and Decision Memorandum at Comment 

21. For a detailed analysis of Far 

Eastern’s margin calculation, see Final 

Determination in the Investigation of 

Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the 

People’s Republic of China: Analysis 

Memorandum for Far Eastern Industries 

(Shanghai) Ltd., dated April 10, 2007. 

We have made the following changes 

to Ningbo Dafa’s margin calculation: 

We have determined that it is 

appropriate to apply partial facts 

available to Ningbo Dafa. As noted 

below in the ‘‘Facts Available’’ Section, 

we are applying the color–specific 

market economy purchase prices of 

Ningbo Dafa’s PET flake invoices to the 

surrogate value of PET flake, based on 

the CONNUM of the finished PSF. See 

below and Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 25. For a 

detailed analysis of Ningbo Dafa’s 

margin calculation, see see Final 

Determination in the Investigation of 

Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the 

People’s Republic of China: Analysis 

Memorandum for Ningbo Dafa Chemical 

Fiber Co., Ltd., dated April 10, 2007. 

In addition, the Department has made 

changes to its calculation of the 

brokerage and handling, PSF wastes and 

by–product surrogate values as 

described in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comments 5 through 9. 

Moreover, the Department has made 

changes to its calculation of surrogate 

financial ratios as described in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 12. The Department has also 

revised the surrogate value for labor to 

$0.83, using a revised expected wage 

rate posted on the Department’s website 

on February 2, 2007. Further, the 

Department determines that it is 

appropriate to apply the methodology 

described in the December 27, 2006, 

Federal Register Notice regarding the 

treatment of negative margin to this 

investigation. See Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 4 and Final 

Modification; Calculation of the 

Weighted–Average Dumping Margin 

During an Antidumping Investigation, 

71 FR 77722 (December 27, 2006). 

Scope of Investigation 

The merchandise subject to this 

proceeding is synthetic staple fibers, not 

carded, combed or otherwise processed 

for spinning, of polyesters measuring 

3.3 decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or more 

in diameter. This merchandise is cut to 

lengths varying from one inch (25 mm) 

to five inches (127 mm). The subject 

merchandise may be coated, usually 

with a silicon or other finish, or not 

coated. PSF is generally used as stuffing 

in sleeping bags, mattresses, ski jackets, 

comforters, cushions, pillows, and 

furniture. 

The following products are excluded 

from the scope: (1) PSF of less than 3.3 

decitex (less than 3 denier) currently 

classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTSUS’’) at subheading 5503.20.0025 

and known to the industry as PSF for 

spinning and generally used in woven 

and knit applications to produce textile 

and apparel products; (2) PSF of 10 to 

18 denier that are cut to lengths of 6 to 

8 inches and that are generally used in 

the manufacture of carpeting; and (3) 

low–melt PSF defined as a bi–

component fiber with an outer, non–

polyester sheath that melts at a 

significantly lower temperature than its 

inner polyester core (classified at 

HTSUS 5503.20.0015). 

Certain PSF is classifiable under the 

HTSUS subheadings 5503.20.0045 and 

5503.20.0065. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the merchandise 

under the orders is dispositive. 

Scope Comments 

We received scope comments from 

ITI. However, these scope comments 

contained untimely and new factual 

information and were rejected by the 

Department. See the Department’s letter 

dated March 19, 2007. No other 

interested party submitted scope 

comments since the Preliminary 

Determination. Therefore, we have not 

changed the scope from the Initiation 

Notice. See Initiation of Antidumping 

Duty Investigation: Certain Polyester 

Staple Fiber from the People’s Republic 

of China, 71 FR 41201 (July 20, 2006) 

(‘‘Initiation Notice’’). 

Facts Available 

Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides 

that if an interested party: (A) withholds 

information that has been requested by 

the Department; (B) fails to provide such 

information in a timely manner or in the 

form or manner requested, subject to 

subsections 782(c)(1) and (e) of the Act; 

(C) significantly impedes a 

determination under the antidumping 

statute; or (D) provides such information 

but the information cannot be verified, 

the Department shall, subject to 

subsection 782(d) of the Act, use facts 

otherwise available in reaching the 

applicable determination. 

Section 782(c)(1) of the Act provides 

that, if an interested party promptly 

notifies the Department that it is unable 

to submit the information in the 

requested form and manner, together 

with a full explanation and suggested 

alternative forms in which such party is 

able to submit the information, the 

Department shall take into 

consideration the ability of the party to 

submit the information in the requested 

form and manner and may modify such 

requirements to the extent necessary to 

avoid imposing an unreasonable burden 

on that party. 

For this final determination, in 

accordance with section 776(a)(2)(B) of 

the Act and 782(c)(1) of the Act, we 

have determined that the use of neutral 

facts available is appropriate for Ningbo 

Dafa’s PET flake. See Issues and 

Decision Memorandum at Comment 20. 

As neutral facts available, we are 

applying the color–specific, market 

economy purchase prices of Ningbo 

Dafa’s PET flake invoices to value PET 

flake, based on the CONNUM of the 

finished PSF. See Analysis for the Final 

Determination of Certain Polyester 

Staple Fiber from the People’s Republic 

of China: Ningbo Dafa Chemical Fiber 

Co., Ltd., dated April 10, 2007. 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Act, we verified the information 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
19692 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 75 / Thursday, April 19, 2007 / Notices 

submitted by the respondents and three 

separate rate applicants for use in our 

final determination. See the 

Department’s verification reports on the 

record of this investigation in the CRU 

with respect to Cixi Jiangnan, Far 

Eastern, Hangzhou Huachuang, Fuda, 

Ningbo Dafa and Tifo. For all verified 

companies, we used standard 

verification procedures, including 

examination of relevant accounting and 

production records, as well as original 

source documents provided by 

respondents. 

Surrogate Country 

In the Preliminary Determination, we 

stated that we had selected India as the 

appropriate surrogate country to use in 

this investigation for the following 

reasons: (1) It is a significant producer 

of comparable merchandise; (2) it is at 

a similar level of economic development 

pursuant to 773(c)(4) of the Act; and (3) 

we have reliable data from India that we 

can use to value the factors of 

production. See Preliminary 

Determination. For the final 

determination, we received no 

comments and made no changes to our 

findings with respect to the selection of 

a surrogate country. 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving non–marketeconomy (‘‘NME’’) countries, the 

Department begins with a rebuttable 

presumption that all companies within 

the country are subject to government 

control and, thus, should be assigned a 

single antidumping duty deposit rate. It 

is the Department’s policy to assign all 

exporters of merchandise subject to an 

investigation in an NME country this 

single rate unless an exporter can 

demonstrate that it is sufficiently 

independent so as to be entitled to a 

separate rate. See Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers 

from the People’s Republic of China, 56 

FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) (‘‘Sparklers’’), 

as amplified by Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the 

People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 

(May 2, 1994) (‘‘Silicon Carbide’’), and 

Section 351.107(d) of the Department’s 

regulations. 

In the Preliminary Determination, we 

found that Cixi Jiangnan, Far Eastern 

and Ningbo Dafa, and the separate rate 

applicants who received a separate rate 

(‘‘Separate Rate Applicants’’) in the 

Preliminary Determination 

demonstrated their eligibility for 

separate–rate status. For the final 

determination, we continue to find that 

the evidence placed on the record of 

this investigation by Cixi Jiangnan, Far 

Eastern and Ningbo Dafa, and the 

Separate Rate Applicants demonstrate 

both a de jure and de facto absence of 

government control, with respect to 

their respective exports of the 

merchandise under investigation, and, 

thus are eligible for separate rate status. 

The PRC–Wide Rate 

In the Preliminary Determination, the 

Department found that certain 

companies and the PRC–wide entity did 

not respond to our requests information. 

In the Preliminary Determination we 

treated these PRC producers/exporters 

as part of the PRC–wide entity because 

they did not demonstrate that they 

operate free of government control over 

their export activities. No additional 

information has been placed on the 

record with respect to these entities 

after the Preliminary Determination. 

The PRC–wide entity has not provided 

the Department with the requested 

information; therefore, pursuant to 

section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, the 

Department continues to find that the 

use of facts available is appropriate to 

determine the PRC–wide rate. Section 

776(b) of the Act provides that, in 

selecting from among the facts 

otherwise available, the Department 

may employ an adverse inference if an 

interested party fails to cooperate by not 

acting to the best of its ability to comply 

with requests for information. See 

Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold–

Rolled Flat–Rolled Carbon–Quality Steel 

Products from the Russian Federation, 

65 FR 5510, 5518 (February 4, 2000). 

See also, ‘‘Statement of Administrative 

Action’’ accompanying the URAA, H.R. 

Rep. No. 103–316, vol. 1, at 870 (1994) 

(‘‘SAA’’). We determined that, because 

the PRC–wide entity did not respond to 

our request for information, it has failed 

to cooperate to the best of its ability. 

Therefore, the Department finds that, in 

selecting from among the facts 

otherwise available, an adverse 

inference is appropriate for the PRC–

wide entity. 

Because we begin with the 

presumption that all companies within 

a NME country are subject to 

government control and because only 

the companies listed under the ‘‘Final 

Determination Margins’’ section below 

have overcome that presumption, we are 

applying a single antidumping rate - the 

PRC–wide rate - to all other exporters of 

subject merchandise from the PRC. Such 

companies did not demonstrate 

entitlement to a separate rate. See, e.g., 

Synthetic Indigo from the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, 65 FR 25706 (May 3, 2000). 

The PRC–wide rate applies to all entries 

of subject merchandise except for 

entries from the respondents which are 

listed in the ‘‘Final Determination 

Margins’’ section below (except as 

noted). 

Critical Circumstances 

In the Preliminary Determiantion, we 

found that there have been massive 

imports of the subject merchandise over 

a relatively short period for Far Eastern. 

In addition, we relied on a period of six 

months as the period, which was the 

maximum duration for the information 

we had available at that time, for 

comparison in preliminarily 

determining whether imports of the 

subject merchandise were massive. 

For the final determination, however, 

we collected an additional three months 

of data from the respondents. After 

analyzing the additional data, we 

continue to find that Far Eastern had 

massive imports of PSF over a relatively 

short period of time. See Memorandum 

from James C. Doyle, Office Director, to 

Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary, Preliminary Affirmative 

Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, (December 15, 2006) at 

2–3 (‘‘Critical Circumstances Memo’’), 

dated April 10, 2007. Moreover, we 

continue to find that Ningbo Dafa, Cixi 

Jiangnan, the Separate Rates Applicants 

and the PRC–wide entity did not have 

massive imports of PSF over a relatively 

short period of time. Id. 

Corroboration 

At the Preliminary Determination, in 

accordance with section 776(c) of the 

Act, we corroborated our adverse facts 

available (‘‘AFA’’) margin by comparing 

the U.S. price and normal values from 

the petition to the U.S. price and normal 

values for the respondents. We continue 

to find that the margin of 44.30 percent 

has probative value. See Memorandum 

to the File: Corroboration of the PRC–

Wide Facts Available Rate for the Final 

Determination in the Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Certain Polyester Staple 

Fiber from the People’s Republic of 

China, dated April 10, 2007 (‘‘Final 

Corroboration Memo’’). Accordingly, we 

find that the rate of 44.30 percent is 

corroborated within the meaning of 

section 776(c) of the Act. 

Final Determination Margins 

We determine that the following 

percentage weighted–average margins 

exist for the POI: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 75 / Thursday, April 19, 2007 / Notices 19693 

PSF FROM THE PRC - WEIGHTED–

AVERAGE DUMPING MARGINS

Exporter & Producer Weighted–Average 

Deposit Rate 

Cixi Jiangnan Chemical 

Co., Ltd. .................... de minimis 

Far Eastern Industries 

(Shanghai) Ltd. ......... 3.47% 

Ningbo Dafa Chemical 

Fiber Co., Ltd. ........... 4.86% 

Cixi Sansheng Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. .... 4.44% 

Cixi Santai Chemical 

Fiber Co., Ltd. ........... 4.44% 

Cixi Waysun Chemical 

Fiber Co., Ltd. ........... 4.44% 

Hangzhou Best Chemical Fibre Co., Ltd. .... 4.44% 

Hangzhou Hanbang 

Chemical Fibre Co., 

Ltd. ............................ 4.44% 

Hangzhou Huachuang 

Co., Ltd. .................... 4.44% 

Hangzhou Sanxin Paper 

Co., Ltd. .................... 4.44% 

Hangzhou Taifu Textile 

Fiber Co., Ltd. ........... 4.44% 

Jiaxang Fuda Chemical 

Fibre Factory ............. 4.44% 

Nantong Luolai Chemical Fiber Co. Ltd. ..... 4.44% 

Nanyang Textile Co., 

Ltd. ............................ 4.44% 

Suzhou PolyFiber Co., 

Ltd. ............................ 4.44% 

Xiamen Xianglu Fiber 

Chemical Co. ............ 4.44% 

Zhaoqing Tifo New 

Fiber Co., Ltd. ........... 4.44% 

Zhejiang Anshun 

Pettechs Fibre Co., 

Ltd. ............................ 4.44% 

Zhejiang Waysun 

Chemical Fiber Co., 

Ltd. ............................ 4.44% 

PRC–Wide Rate ........... 44.30% 

Disclosure 

We will disclose the calculations 

performed within five days of the date 

of publication of this notice to parties in 

this proceeding in accordance with 19 

CFR 351.224(b). 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the 

Act, we will instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to continue 

to suspend liquidation of all entries of 

subject merchandise from Ningo Dafa, 

the Separate Rate Applicants and the 

PRC–wide entity entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after December 26, 2006, the date of 

publication of the Preliminary 

Determination. CBP shall continue to 

require a cash deposit or the posting of 

a bond equal to the estimated amount by 

which the normal value exceeds the 

U.S. price as shown above. 

The Department continues to find that 

critical circumstances exist for Far 

Eastern therefore, the Department will 

direct the CBP suspend liquidation of 

any entries of PSF from the PRC as 

described in the ‘‘Scope of 

Investigation’’ section, that are entered, 

or withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption 90 days before the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register. These suspension of 

liquidation instructions will remain in 

effect until further notice. 

With respect to Cixi Jiangnan, the 

Department will instruct CBP not to 

suspend liquidation of any entries of 

PSF from the PRC as described in the 

‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ section, that 

are entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

the date of publication of this notice in 

the Federal Register. The Department 

will not require any cash deposit or 

posting of a bond for Cixi Jiangnan 

when the subject merchandise is 

produced and exported by Cixi 

Jiangnan. These suspension of 

liquidation instructions will remain in 

effect until further notice. 

ITC Notification 

In accordance with section 735(d) of 

the Act, we have notified the 

International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) 

of our final determination of sales at 

LTFV. As our final determination is 

affirmative, in accordance with section 

735(b)(2) of the Act, within 45 days the 

ITC will determine whether the 

domestic industry in the United States 

is materially injured, or threatened with 

material injury, by reason of imports or 

sales (or the likelihood of sales) for 

importation of the subject merchandise. 

If the ITC determines that material 

injury or threat of material injury does 

not exist, the proceeding will be 

terminated and all securities posted will 

be refunded or canceled. If the ITC 

determines that such injury does exist, 

the Department will issue an 

antidumping duty order directing CBP 

to assess antidumping duties on all 

imports of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the effective 

date of the suspension of liquidation. 

Notification Regarding APO 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to the parties subject to administrative 

protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely 

notification of return or destruction of 

APO materials or conversion to judicial 

protective order is hereby requested. 

Failure to comply with the regulations 

and the terms of an APO is a 

sanctionable violation. This 

determination and notice are issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

This determination and notice are 

issued and published in accordance 

with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the 

Act. 

Dated: April 10, 2007. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Changes from the Preliminary 

Determination 

General Comments: 

Comment 1: Zeroing/Targeted Dumping 

Comment 2: Adjustments to Market 

Economy Purchases–Foreign Inland 

Freight 

Comment 3: Adjustments to Market 

Economy Purchases–Foreign Brokerage 

& Handling 

Comment 4: Adjustments to Market 

Economy Purchases–Application of PRC 

Duties 

Surrogate Value Comments: 

Comment 5: Surrogate Value for 

Brokerage & Handling 

Comment 6: Surrogate Value for Waste 

Inputs 

Comment 7: Surrogate Value for 

Polymer Polyester Staple Fiber Waste 

Comment 8: Surrogate Value for Lump, 

Popcorn or X–ray Film 

Comment 9: Surrogate Value for Scrap 

Waste By–Product 

Comment 10: Surrogate Value for Labor 

Comment 11: Surrogate Value for Alkali 

Flake 

Comment 12: Calculation of Surrogate 

Financial Ratios 

Comment 13: General Export Subsidy 

Countries and Market Economy Inputs 

Company Specific Comments - Cixi 

Jiangnan: 

Comment 14: Cixi Jiangnan’s Sales to 

Trading Companies 

Comment 15: Cixi Jiangnan’s 

International Freight for Its U.S. Sales 

Comment 16: Cixi Jiangnan’s Indirect 

Labor 

Comment 17: Insurance for Cixi’s 

Market Economy Purchases 

Company Specific Comments - Far 

Eastern: 

Comment 18: Far Eastern’s Critical 

Circumstances 

Comment 19: Far Eastern’s Reported 

Scrap Offsets 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
19694 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 75 / Thursday, April 19, 2007 / Notices 

Comment 20: Far Eastern’s Bank 

Charges 

Comment 21: Far Eastern’s Market 

Economy Price for Ethylene Glycol 

Comment 22: Far Eastern’s Market 

Economy Price Adjustments for Purified 

Terephthalic Acid (‘‘PTA’’) 

Comment 23: Far Eastern’s Brokerage 

and Handling Expenses 

Company Specific Comments - Ningbo 

Dafa: 

Comment 24: Ningbo Dafa’s 

Consumption of Oils 

Comment 25: Ningbo Dafa’s Market 

Economy Purchases and Factor Usage of 

PET Flake 

[FR Doc. E7–7386 Filed 4–18–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–894] 

Certain Tissue Paper Products from 

the People’s Republic of China: Notice 

of Extension of Time Limit for Final 

Results of First Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 19, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristina Horgan or Bobby Wong, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 9, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–8173 or (202) 482–

0409, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On April 9, 2007, the Department of 

Commerce (the Department) published 

in the Federal Register the preliminary 

results of this antidumping duty 

administrative review. See Certain 

Tissue Paper Products from the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Results 

of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 72 FR 17477 (April 09, 2007). 

Extension of Time Limits for Final 

Results 

Pursuant to Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), 

and section 351.213(h)(1) of the 

Department’s regulations, the 

Department shall issue the final results 

of review within 120 days after the date 

on which the notice of the preliminary 

results was published in the Federal 

Register. However, if the Department 

determines that it is not practicable to 

complete the review within this time 

period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act 

and section 351.213(h)(2) of the 

Department’s regulations allow the 

Department to extend this time period 

to 180 days. 

In the instant review, the Department 

finds that the current deadline for the 

final results is impracticable. 

Specifically, the Department requires 

additional time to conduct verifications 

of the exporters and their producers and 

to review and analyze interested party 

comments, including issues involving 

alleged third–country shipments of 

subject merchandise. As a result, the 

Department has determined to extend 

the current time limits of this 

administrative review. For these 

reasons, the Department is fully 

extending the time limit for the 

completion of these final results until 

no later than Tuesday, October 9, 2007, 

in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) 

of the Act. 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) 

and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: April 12, 2007. 

Stephen J. Claeys, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–7452 Filed 4–18–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–580–851] 

Dynamic Random Access Memory 

Semiconductors from the Republic of 

Korea: Extension of Time Limit for 

Preliminary Results of the 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 19, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Yasmin Nair at (202) 482–3813 or David 

Neubacher at (202) 482–5823; AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 1, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 29, 2006, the 

Department published a notice of 

initiation of administrative review of the 

countervailing duty order on dynamic 

random access memory semiconductors 

from the Republic of Korea, covering the 

period January 1, 2005 through 

December 31, 2005. See Notice of 

Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews, 71 FR 57465 (September 29, 

2006). On December 11, 2006, the 

petitioner alleged that Hynix 

Semiconductor, Inc., received new 

subsidies. 

Statutory Time Limits 

Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), 

requires the Department of Commerce 

(‘‘the Department’’) to issue the 

preliminary results of an administrative 

review within 245 days after the last day 

of the anniversary month of an order for 

which a review is requested and the 

final results of review within 120 days 

after the date on which the preliminary 

results are published. If it is not 

practicable to complete the review 

within the time period, section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the 

Department to extend these deadlines to 

a maximum of 365 days and 180 days, 

respectively. 

Extension of Time Limits for 

Preliminary Results 

This administrative review is 

extraordinarily complicated due to the 

complexity of the countervailable 

subsidy practices found in the 

investigation and the new subsidy 

allegations. Because the Department 

requires additional time to review, 

analyze, and possibly verify the 

information, and to issue supplemental 

questionnaires, if necessary, it is not 

practicable to complete this review 

within the originally anticipated time 

limit (i.e., by May 3, 2007). Therefore, 

the Department is extending the time 

limit for completion of the preliminary 

results to not later than August 31, 2007, 

in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) 

of the Act. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

notice in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: April 12, 2007. 

Stephen J. Claeys, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–7451 Filed 4–18–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES